Fucking Bullshit

Byrnzie

miller8966 wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

Were they 'protecting him' though?
And if Bush wanted him caught then he would have been by now.quote]

I guess clinton was protecting him too?

Protecting him too? Along with who? Bush? I didn't say that Bush was protecting him.

norm

Byrnzie wrote:

And if Bush wanted him caught then he would have been by now. Perhaps he's more useful alive though, because we all need an enemy with a recognized face to justify our 'war with no end', right?

Nail, head, hit. W needs to keep people scared of something otherwise he loses power.

NCfan

cutback wrote:

Nail, head, hit. W needs to keep people scared of something otherwise he loses power.

Try putting your blind hatred on the shelf for a second and think about what you just wrote.

If Bush were to catch or kill Osama, his approval rating would shoot up 20% over night.

As it stands, there is virtually no power he has left to lose.

angelica

NCfan wrote:

Try putting your blind hatred on the shelf for a second and think about what you just wrote.

If Bush were to catch or kill Osama, his approval rating would shoot up 20% over night.

As it stands, there is virtually no power he has left to lose.

In order to get the concept of Osama-as-boogie-man, you have to recognise it for what it is and how it's been manipulated in order to keep people playing along so far. It's not about hatred, it's about awareness.

NCfan

angelica wrote:

In order to get the concept of Osama-as-boogie-man, you have to recognise it for what it is and how it's been manipulated in order to keep people playing along so far. It's not about hatred, it's about awareness.

What makes you think I don't understand this concept? Am I asking questions about it? Have I said something incorrect about it?

Maybe it's because I disagree with it - is that it?

Seems to me you're saying that in order for me to understand this concept, I have to agree that Bush has been manipulating the people.

Is it possible for me to understand this concept, yet disagree with it? I don't believe Bush has been manipulating the people by creating Osama the boogie man.


You guys seem to think that Bush purposely let Osama go, becuase Osama gives him a reason to perpetuate his foreign policy.

But let me ask you then. If Bush were to catch or kill Osama, would he not gain significant credibility? Would he not go down in history as the American president who was steadfast in his effort to catch perhaps one of the most hated and sought after men in American history???

miller8966

nc fan i completely agree with you

angelica

NCfan wrote:

What makes you think I don't understand this concept?

See next quote.

NCfan wrote:

I don't believe Bush has been manipulating the people by creating Osama the boogie man.

NCfan wrote:

You guys seem to think that Bush purposely let Osama go, becuase Osama gives him a reason to perpetuate his foreign policy.

I don't believe he purposely let him go. I believe there's been a lot of incompetence going down, and that they are very happy to capitalise on it, like they have capitalised on 911 for years, milking people's basest emotions.

norm

NCfan wrote:

You guys seem to think that Bush purposely let Osama go, becuase Osama gives him a reason to perpetuate his foreign policy.

Yes, I do.

NCfan wrote:

But let me ask you then. If Bush were to catch or kill Osama, would he not gain significant credibility? Would he not go down in history as the American president who was steadfast in his effort to catch perhaps one of the most hated and sought after men in American history???

No. He has had 5 years to do that but he didn't. He used those resources to invade Iraq. Had he put forth the effort he did in Iraq into eliminating Al Queda then he would have credibility, at least from me.

callen

angelica wrote:

In order to get the concept of Osama-as-boogie-man, you have to recognise it for what it is and how it's been manipulated in order to keep people playing along so far. It's not about hatred, it's about awareness.

have it right and or wrong. Osama is bad...really bad and needed to be removed from power....but I also think Bush (okay Cheney/Rove/etc) milk it for all its worth....ie..scaring the poor white american.

callen

cutback wrote:

Yes, I do.



No. He has had 5 years to do that but he didn't. He used those resources to invade Iraq. Had he put forth the effort he did in Iraq into eliminating Al Queda then he would have credibility, at least from me.

I'm thinking the Bush administration would have loved to catch Osama....to think otherwise is pretty cooky.....if thats a word..but think you know what I mean.....and I just have to stop supporting JLEW and freakin right wing extremist NC fan....(-: Joking of course.

angelica

callen wrote:

have it right and or wrong. Osama is bad...really bad and needed to be removed from power....but I also think Bush (okay Cheney/Rove/etc) milk it for all its worth....ie..scaring the poor white american.

I didn't say Osama was bad or not-bad. I really have no clue. And what I hear is so distorted that I don't trust anything but my own perceptions. And they are drawing a blank. Bush on the other hand, he's pretty obvious.

NCfan

angelica wrote:

See next quote.





I don't believe he purposely let him go. I believe there's been a lot of incompetence going down, and that they are very happy to capitalise on it, like they have capitalised on 911 for years, milking people's basest emotions.

You can believe whatever you wish. But there is also another very plausible explanation. And in my opinion it makes more sense than your scenario - that's the only reason I believe it - it just makes more sense. So, it might be a better rebulte to poke holes in my belief rather than just tell me I don't understand.

I doubt with every cell in my body that Bush has ever once been happy that Osama has not been caught. The first criticim leveled on him when the war drums began to beat around the Iraq issue is that he had taken his eye off the goal in Afghanistan - that he had let Osama go!!!

If at any point over the last 5 years Bush had caught Osama, he would be lauded and his approval ratings would soar.

And at this point in his presidency, catching Osama could very well be the only viable way to save any credibility he has and change his legacy.

So why then would he be "happy" to capitalize on what is percieved by most in the world to be one of his biggest blunders and biggest areas of incompetance????

norm

callen wrote:

I'm thinking the Bush administration would have loved to catch Osama....

Then why haven't we? I wouldn't be the least surprised if by the end of this year, Osama has been caught. Then W can claim a victory in the war on terror and, at least in his mind, secure his legacy.

NCfan

angelica wrote:

I didn't say Osama was bad or not-bad. I really have no clue. And what I hear is so distorted that I don't trust anything but my own perceptions. And they are drawing a blank. Bush on the other hand, he's pretty obvious.

WOW, I thought more highly of you than this...

Tell me you've seen at least one of the videos of Osama preaching about Jihad and killing Infidels. Just google some stuff on him. It is all translated word for word from his mouth. There is not dispute these are his words, and there is no distortion of his goals. He says it in plain language.

NCfan

cutback wrote:

Then why haven't we? I wouldn't be the least surprised if by the end of this year, Osama has been caught. Then W can claim a victory in the war on terror and, at least in his mind, secure his legacy.

I have no idea. But to assume that just becuase we haven't caught him yet = we don't want to is baseless. It's just an opinion propped up by opinion.

callen

cutback wrote:

Then why haven't we? I wouldn't be the least surprised if by the end of this year, Osama has been caught. Then W can claim a victory in the war on terror and, at least in his mind, secure his legacy.

with lots of freinds and hiding places....I don't think its as easy as you think to find him...really don't. Bush would just love to have him caught...you must know he's a broken man right now..and all the folks in his administration have egg on their face...so I just can't fathom they're purposefully keeping free.

jlew24asu

angelica wrote:

I didn't say Osama was bad or not-bad. I really have no clue. And what I hear is so distorted that I don't trust anything but my own perceptions. And they are drawing a blank. Bush on the other hand, he's pretty obvious.

come on now. you are really going to tell me that you dont know if osama is bad or not bad? really ? seriously?

jlew24asu

callen wrote:

with lots of freinds and hiding places....I don't think its as easy as you think to find him...really don't. Bush would just love to have him caught...you must know he's a broken man right now..and all the folks in his administration have egg on their face...so I just can't fathom they're purposefully keeping free.

atta boy callen. I knew I liked you for some reason

angelica

NCfan wrote:

WOW, I thought more highly of you than this...

Tell me you've seen at least one of the videos of Osama preaching about Jihad and killing Infidels. Just google some stuff on him. It is all translated word for word from his mouth. There is not dispute these are his words, and there is no distortion of his goals. He says it in plain language.

Throw out all your preconceptions about me, NCfan. I'll be back wayy later to respond to these posts directed to me.

callen

angelica wrote:

I didn't say Osama was bad or not-bad. I really have no clue. And what I hear is so distorted that I don't trust anything but my own perceptions. And they are drawing a blank. Bush on the other hand, he's pretty obvious.

I'm pretty certain he uses religion to further his cause...and I pretty much detest anyone that does that.....including George....so he's a bad boy....I do though get what your saying on the distorted info...no doubt..very one sided and more importantly self serving for the masses.